Elaine
06-16-2010, 08:49 AM
I had a conversation recently with a friend who was frustrated by what they felt was “judging not grounded in an accurate and objective assessment of the dog.” I.e, the judge was only putting up a particular handler, regardless of the quaity of the dog[s].
:mad:
That sort of thing has gone on for years... it has been tacitly tolerated in the past, but given that it is extremely expensive to show dogs these days, with entry fees at $30+ and handling fees starting at about $100 per class (plus expenses), it is simply not acceptable anymore. Add in other expenses like gas, lodging, meals, time away from work, etc. and a show weekend can easily run between $500 and a $1,000, per dog, depending on if you show just Sat and Sun or Th, Fri, Sat Sun. I can see where exhibitors would get pretty angry pretty fast if they felt they were not getting a fair eval in the ring. (Btw, that is why we had no problem with giving back the ribbon on Wah when people objected that Arthur and I knew MR. Gladstone. Sure, we could have fought it, and said, "Bullshit, people in dogs know each other, they often know each other very well. Do you think that Tony did not know Sonny, who gave his 9-12 puppy the Group over Scarlet!!!" Instead, we said, “Hey, no problem, we understand. Though we know that Mr. Gladstone judges the dogs in his ring as he sees them on the day, we understood why it bothers some people.”
And it does bother people, because the truth is that some wins are arranged in advance, and it is infuriating when you are at the loosing end of it all.
It can be very subtle… and very hard to prove. I have a letter Old George Murray asked me to write for him (to send to AKC) back in 2004, when he had just started judging and he purportedly believed that the Whites were putting pressure n him to put up Ann. You can see from the details that the data came from George.. and it exposes some of what actually goes on behind the scenes. I will post it later today. It is, btw the way , one reason I have absolutely zero respect for George and the Whites.
In the interim, anyone have any similar experiences?
:mad:
That sort of thing has gone on for years... it has been tacitly tolerated in the past, but given that it is extremely expensive to show dogs these days, with entry fees at $30+ and handling fees starting at about $100 per class (plus expenses), it is simply not acceptable anymore. Add in other expenses like gas, lodging, meals, time away from work, etc. and a show weekend can easily run between $500 and a $1,000, per dog, depending on if you show just Sat and Sun or Th, Fri, Sat Sun. I can see where exhibitors would get pretty angry pretty fast if they felt they were not getting a fair eval in the ring. (Btw, that is why we had no problem with giving back the ribbon on Wah when people objected that Arthur and I knew MR. Gladstone. Sure, we could have fought it, and said, "Bullshit, people in dogs know each other, they often know each other very well. Do you think that Tony did not know Sonny, who gave his 9-12 puppy the Group over Scarlet!!!" Instead, we said, “Hey, no problem, we understand. Though we know that Mr. Gladstone judges the dogs in his ring as he sees them on the day, we understood why it bothers some people.”
And it does bother people, because the truth is that some wins are arranged in advance, and it is infuriating when you are at the loosing end of it all.
It can be very subtle… and very hard to prove. I have a letter Old George Murray asked me to write for him (to send to AKC) back in 2004, when he had just started judging and he purportedly believed that the Whites were putting pressure n him to put up Ann. You can see from the details that the data came from George.. and it exposes some of what actually goes on behind the scenes. I will post it later today. It is, btw the way , one reason I have absolutely zero respect for George and the Whites.
In the interim, anyone have any similar experiences?